Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Tata Aig General Insurance Company ... vs Padam Singh on 10 September, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:39848]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8487/2025
Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited, Through The
Branch Manager. Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited,
2nd Floor, Lk Tower, Chopasani Road, Jodhpur Tehsil And District
Sirohi Through Its Authorized Signatory Ashok Kumar Sharma
S/o Dal Chand Sharma Aged 34 Years At Present Working As
Chief Manager, Legal.
----Petitioner
Versus
Padam Singh S/o Vijay Singh, Aged About 50 Years, Hanuman Ki
Gali, Tankiya, Sirohi, District Sirohi.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya Singhi.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
Reserved on : 08/09/2025
Pronounced on : 10/09/2025
1. On the joint request made by learned counsel for the parties,
the writ petition is finally heard.
2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayer :-
"i)- by an appropriate writ, order and/or direction, the
impugned award dated 17.01.2025 (Annexure-1) passed by the
Permanent Lok Adalat in the case number 27/2024 (PLA), titled
Padam Singh Versus Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited,
be quashed and set aside being unjustified and arbitrary; and
ii)- Any other appropriate order or direction which this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the
petitioner.
iii)- Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the
petitioner."
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 11:03:39 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:39848] (2 of 4) [CW-8487/2025]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Permanent Lok Adalat, Sirohi ('PLA') has committed serious error
in allowing the claim submitted by the respondent. It is stated that
the vehicle in question was already transferred by the claimant
and therefore, the claim at the instance of the present respondent
(claimant) was not maintainable. It is further submitted that the
PLA committed serious error in entertaining the claim petition and
awarding a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. If the specified amount is not
paid within two months, the petitioner will be liable to pay interest
on the award amount @ 12% per annum, from the date of the
judgment until the actual payment of the award amount.
Additionally, an amount of Rs.5,000/- has also been awarded
towards expenses.
3.1 He further submits that an agreement to sale was executed
between respondent - Padam Singh & Ajay Pal Singh and
therefore, as per the terms and conditions of the policy, the
relationship between the insurer and the insurance company came
to an end and hence, the claim could not have been entertained
based on the policy, which was executed in the name of original
insurer.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that
though an agreement was executed on 13.10.2021, however, the
same was conditional i.e. subject to depositing all the
installments. Since the terms and conditions as agreed in the
agreement were not honoured, therefore, the said agreement
became meaningless. He further submits that even otherwise, the
vehicle was not transferred and even as on date the vehicle is in
the name of the present respondent. It is further submitted by
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 11:03:39 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:39848] (3 of 4) [CW-8487/2025]
learned counsel for the respondent that the petitioner has neither
submitted policy document nor made any averments before the
PLA to establish the fact that the relationship between the original
insurer and insurance company came to an end on account of
agreement to sale being executed in relation to the vehicle in
question. It is also submitted that in the present case, the transfer
of a vehicle becomes effective only after the necessary changes
with regard to transfer, are made in the registration certificate.
4.1 To strengthen the arguments submitted by the learned
counsel for the respondent, reliance is placed on the judgment
rendered by the Allahabad High Court (At Lucknow) in the case of
The New India Assurance Company Limited, Lakhimpur
Kheri Vs. Permanent Lok Adalat, Lakhimpur Kheri & Anr.
(Case : Matters under Art.227 No.3907 of 2024), decided on
13.09.2024, while contending that the relationship between the
registered owner and the insurance company continues till the
transfer is made effective in the registration certificate.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
6. In the present case, the vehicle in question was originally in
the name of one Padam Singh and it continued to remain in the
name of original owner till date. It is noted that the vehicle in
question was purchased by Padam Singh i.e. the present
respondent. Though an agreement to sale was executed between
Padam Singh and one Ajay Pal Singh, however, the same was
subject to fulfillment of certain conditions.
7. Be that as it may, even up to the date of filing of the claim
before the PLA, the present respondent continued to remain as a
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 11:03:39 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:39848] (4 of 4) [CW-8487/2025]
registered owner of the vehicle and therefore, his claim based on
the insurance policy cannot be denied merely on the basis of
agreement to sale. Even otherwise, no document was placed on
record before the PLA or before this Court to show that there was
any such policy condition, which makes the policy inoperative on
account of an agreement to sale.
8. In the case of The New India Assurance Company
Limited, Lakhimpur Kheri (supra), it was observed that the
intention of the legislature is to make the insurance company
liable immediately, till the transfer is not recorded in the records of
the transport office.
9. In the present case, the transfer of ownership has not been
completed, and the respondent-claimant remains the registered
owner of the vehicle in question. The respondent-claimant had
entered into an insurance contract with the petitioner and
subsequently filed the claim before the PLA.
10. Since the ownership of the vehicle has not been transferred,
the petitioner remains liable under the insurance contract entered
into with the respondent-claimant.
11. In view of the discussion made above, this Court does not
find any illegality in the order passed by the Permanent Lok
Adalat. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
12. All pending application (s), if any, also stand(s), disposed of.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J
Rmathur/-
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 11:03:39 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
